If
you missed the American Masters episode on Margaret Mitchell yesterday, you can
still tune in to PBS tonight to catch the one on Phillip Roth. Thanks to Tucker
for the tip.
And
speaking of things literary on television and in cinema, there’s a ton of free
stuff out there that I’m going to start sharing over the next few weeks (-thus
the title of this post.)
Did
you know, for example, that some film-makers believe in a “curse of Quixote”
that will undermine any efforts to adapt the novel on the silver screen? It’s a
long enough book to discourage even the most ambitious directors, but it’s also
a project that’s gotten the best of a couple who have tried: Orson Wells, for
one, spent 20 unfruitful years on the quest, and Terry Gilliam flamed out some
years later. This documentary chronicles the woes that beset Gilliam almost
from the outset of his ill-fated efforts. The good stuff starts about 40
minutes in, when his first shooting location is harried by F16s and swept away in a flash flood.
Enjoy:
V.S Naipaul is a celebrated Trinidadian Indian, but those big
jowls and heavy eyelids remind me a bit of old Kicking Bird (Graham Greene), a
fictional American Indian. "Tatonka."
Here’s beloved chilldren’s author A.A. Milne and Ralph
Fiennes. One gave us Winnie the Pooh, the other gave us Lord Voldemort.
With his low-set, bushy eyebrows and big ears, J.R.R. Tolkien
isn’t a bad match for the Lloyd Bridges of “Hot Shots Part Deux” vintage.
And J.P. Donleavy’s earnest gaze seems to say, “These aren’t
the droids you’re looking for,” doesn’t it? Dead ringer for Alec Guiness.
It took me a long time to think of who T.S. Eliot reminded me
of, but take a look at this side-by-side and tell me you’re not concocting
theories about Rowan Atkinson being his love child.
Philip
Roth has been making headlines recently by refusing to publish anything new (he
has officially retired from writing.) But I couldn’t really add my voice to the chorus of voices that are reacting to
that news, because I’d never really read the man. That is, until I picked up Nemesis
a couple of weeks ago. So, what
is my impression of Roth?
In
truth, I don’t feel like my having read his 31st and final novel
gives me too much insight into this perennial Nobel contender. Roth’s got more
prestigious awards than you can shake a stick at, and the only award Nemesis was shortlisted for was the Wellcome Trust
Book Prize, which happens to celebrate medicine in literature (the book
concerns a war-time Polio epidemic.)
But
I was wholly drawn into this story of a young playground director who finds
himself battling the scourge of polio at home, while his best friends fight on
the front lines of World War II. What with
the baseball backdrop, the overhanging shadow of war, and a New York-area Jewish
youth wrestling with religious themes, the book felt like a fitting companion
to Chaim Potok’s The Chosen , a book
I absolutely loved. (Mr. Cantor? Mr. Galanter? Eh? Eh?) But unlike The Chosen , which ends up affirming
religious faith, Nemesis is the account of faith lost.
The
book’s title is never really explained, but since the story unravels like a
classic Greek tragedy, we can only assume that “Nemesis” signifies the Greek
goddess of vengeful retribution, come in the form of the Polio virus. I’ve
spoiled enough of the story as it is, but I’ll just say that Roth breathed
enough life into the time period and
setting to make me want to check out some of his other work. You should, too.
I
just finished reading The Paris Wife by Paula McLain, and not long before that, I
tackled Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris
and London , so I’ve had early 20th century Paris on my mind
lately (though that’s not rare around here.) Here is an interesting photo
project comparing the Paris of our day with the Paris that would have been
known by the famous writers of the Lost Generation.
My
first visit to Paris was as charming as I’d ever hoped it would be, but looking
at these ‘before-and-after’s at Rue89, one can’t help but see that it’s lost just a
little of its magic:
There’s
been lots of talk about shrinking author advances lately, with the once-common
$10,000 advances for mid-list writers being replaced by sums that are half, or even
a fourth of that amount. Author royalties above and beyond the advance can
still add up, but trickling in as they do twice a year for a pretty limited
period before bookstores return the unsold copies to be pulped by the publisher,
they’re hardly a sure-fire way to get rich quick.
But
you’re not alone, discouraged writer. One of the most-heralded debut short
story collections of the last century, Ernest Hemingway’s In Our Time , was given an advance of only $200 in 1925. In today’s
money, that comes to just under $2,600. And the print run? A whopping 1,335
copies. If He was lucky enough to get, say 25% in royalties (most would kill
for that today), and every book sold, he was looking at another $8,600 in today’s
money. (The book was priced at $2.00 a copy)
No
wonder he had to keep slaving away as a foreign correspondent while penning his
fiction.
I’ve "Quixoted" you to death this week, so today, a “did you know” celebrity fun-fact for a change of pace.
Fact #1: Conan O’Brien is in
Atlanta shooting sketches for a series of Atlanta-based shows to be aired
during Final Four week (The Final Four is in Atlanta this year).
Fact #2: The company I work for
sponsors Conan’s show, and by the fortuitous whim of some corporate sponsorship
genius, he was scheduled to drop by for a townhall meeting Wednesday.
Fact #3: I was among the lucky
attendees at said townhall (lightning fast email responses pay dividends)
Fact #4: Conan is hilarious.
Some of you may not like that fact, but it’s true.
Fact#5, revealed at the townhall, also known as
the Celebrity Fun-Fact: While at Harvard Mr. O’Brien authored a thesis titled “Literary
Progeria in the Works of Flannery O’Connor and William Faulkner.” Here are a
couple excerpts:
“The
American South has undergone such a period of self-examination in the early and
mid-20th century known as the Southern Literary Renaissance. During the
Renaissance, historians, fiction writers, and sociologists began to search for
a sense of regional character by sorting through the stories, ideals, legalisms
and codes of the Southern experience. The search invariably forced these
intellectuals to decide which visions of the Old South to keep, which to
abandon, and which to re-write. The answers have varied widely but the
essential question has remained the same: How should the South's notion of what
it was determine its new identity? The purpose of this thesis is not to find
the answer but to examine the power and prevalence of the question.
“W.J.
Cash argues that the South is a child, indulging itself with comfortable myths
of innocence, while C. Van Woodward maintains the South is a pre-maturely aged
region, stripped of its childhood legends by a series of bitter, awakening
defeats. Although they disagree, both men associate the South's old myths with
the metaphor of childhood. This image seems appropriate because children need
to forge a sense of self and they rely heavily on myths for spiritual
sustenance. In their years of rapid growth children thirst for beliefs and
ideals as a foundation for their newly-forming identity.…“I have found that several Southern
Renaissance writers have articulated their regional sense of contradiction
through what I have termed literary progeria. Progeria is an often fatal
disease that strikes children and ages them pre-maturely. In the works of
several Southern writers the child protagonist becomes "old" long
before his time because he is tormented by the same anxiety over myth which
troubles Cash and Woodward. In an effort to construct an identity the child
is drawn to past myths and builds the foundation of his character on archaic
beliefs. The result is that this child caries the vast experience of these
myths as burden; he or she becomes an "old child" who tries
unsuccessfully to reconcile his elderly identity with the modern world. I have
found variations of the "old child" who tries unsuccessfully (sic) to
reconcile his elderly identity with the modern world. I have found variations
of the "old child" symbol in Katherine Anne Porter's _Pale Horse,
Pale Rider _ as well as in Caron McCuller's _The Heart is a Lonely Hunter_ and
_A Member of the Wedding_, but these authors do not explore the symbol
extensively enough to establish its characteristics and thematic significance.
Both William Faulkner and Flannery O'Connor do develop the "old
child" symbol extensively, however, and although they differ in their
specific fictional concerns it is clear that the image emanates from similar
regional instinct. Each author places the "old child" in the center
of generational argument over the value of past myths and the child, unable to
reconcile opposing views, represents experience and thus an anguished state of
conflicting loyalties. The extreme generational attitudes towards myth resemble
the same extremes Cash and Woodward delineate in their argument over the
South's relation to the past. The myth Faulkner's children turn to is the myth
of the Old South and his "old children" suffer from a spiritual
progeria. O'Connor adds a second layer of significance to the symbol by
incorporating the myth of Christian redemption and this increased complexity
produces in her children both a spiritual _and_ a physical progeria which
borders on the freakish.”
I’m
a bit of a map freak. I could look at maps all day long. And as you’ve probably noticed
by now, placing the fiction I read into its real-world, geographical context is
something I really. find. interesting.
But
Don Quixote presents its readers with a real quandary. You can find a few
modern maps that purport to track parts of the journey of Quixote and his squire,
and you can find some travel pages that will tell you “These are the very
windmills that inspired Cervantes’ classic,” but let’s be honest. This thing’s
over four hundred years old. And even the few maps that were drawn in the 17th,
18th and 19th centuries don’t generally agree on all the
landmarks (here is a great resource to skim through.)
But
of those maps that show the full view of all three “sallies,” or journeys, covered
in the book, there are two that match up sort of closely. This one, published
in the first edition of Don Quixote for the Royal Academy of Spain in 1780,
shows the one-way journeys (or round-trip journeys that assume returns along
the same paths). By the way, this one can be blown up huge if you click through on the image:
This second one, from 1798, shows a more meandering loop for each of the sallies, but generally
covers the same ground:
But
both maps are zoomed in pretty closely, so it’s hard to see exactly where in Spain
the action is unfolding. So, for your viewing pleasure, here are the same two routes,
superimposed on the Iberian Peninsula. Green marks the first sally. Red marks the second. And blue marks the third. Do with these what you will.
We’ve
posted about “literary” fan fiction before- where fans take a classic book and
continue or add to the story using their own ideas and imagination.
But
every once in a while a classic tale can serve as the launching pad for a work
that becomes a classic in its own right. Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea jumps off
the shoulders of Jane Eyre , J.M. Coetzee
re-imagines Robinson Cruso in his book Foe , while Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz
and Gildenstern Are Dead fleshes out
the lives (or imminent deaths) of two bit-characters from Shakespeare’s Hamlet .
But
these classics-begotten-by-classics generally reach back in time quite a ways. You
don’t often see a serious author riff off of the work of a contemporary (And no,
Fifty Shades and Twilight
don’t count.) But it turns out Shakespeare,
of all people, wasn’t above it.
The
first English translation of Cervantes’ Don
Quixote hit England’s shores in 1612.
In it, you find the side-story of a ruined and ragged youth named Cardenio. A
year later, in 1613, a play by the name of “The History of Cardenio,” attributed
to Shakespeare, but now lost, made its London debut.
Blatant
opportunism? Or flattering fan-fic? Sadly,
we’ll never know.
Lest you think yesterday’s post was just an
excuse to engage in a little literary bathroom humor, we are adding some
additional color on the matter today (naturally!)
As our long-time
readers already know, we don’t need an excuse to delve into sophomoric topics-
we do that all the time. But many of you may not have realized that yesterday’s
passage from Don Quixote touches on an important Spanish cultural tradition.
Yes, we’re serious. See this article, for example.
Now, Sancho wasn’t
crapping in a crèche like your typical Caganer, but there’s no denying the
Spanish affinity for dropping a deuce into all sorts of situations- both
profound and profane. This is a nation that celebrates the birth of Christ with
a sewer snake and a people whose greatest insult is “I (obscenity) in the milk
of the whore that bore you.” So, why shouldn’t their rope cutting aficion
spread through its greatest literature?
Well, it should. And it
does. We should embrace it.
A
fantastic passage from the Quixote. In pitch darkness, DQ and Sancho are
stopped in their tracks by some ominous sounds that they will later identify as
fulling hammers. Sancho secretly hobbles his master's horse to keep him from investigating, and stands next to him holding the saddle, too afraid to move:
At
this moment it seems that either because of the cold of the morning, which was
approaching, or because Sancho had eaten something laxative for supper, or
because it was in the natural order of things—which is the most credible—he
felt the urge and desire to do what no one else could do for him, but his heart
was so overwhelmed by fear that he did not dare to move a nail paring away from
his master. But not doing what he desired to do was not possible, either, and so what he did as a
compromise was to free his right hand, which was clutching the back of the
saddle, and with it, cunningly and without making a sound, he loosened the slip
knot that was the only thing holding up his breeches, and when he did this they
came down and settled around his ankles like leg irons. After this he lifted
his shirt the best he could and stuck out both buttocks, which were not very
small. Having done this—which he thought was all he had to do to escape that
terrible difficulty and anguish—he was overcome by an even greater distress,
which was that it seemed to him he could not relieve himself without making
some noise and sound, and he began to clench his teeth and hunch his shoulders,
holding his breath as much as he could, but despite all his efforts, he was so
unfortunate that he finally made a little noise quite different from the one
that had caused him so much fear. Don Quixote heard it and said:
“What
Sound is that, Sancho?”
“I
don’t know, Senor,” he responded. “It must be something new; adventures and
misadventures never begin for no reason.”
He
tried his luck again, and things went so smoothly that with no more noise or
disturbance than the last time, he found himself rid of the burden that had
caused him so much grief. But since Don Quixote had a sense of smell as acute
as his hearing, and Sancho was joined so closely to him, and the vapors rose up
almost in a straight line, some unavoidably reached his nostrils, and as soon
as they did he came to the assistance of his nostrils and squeezed them closed
between, and in a somewhat nasal voice, he said:
“It
seems to me, Sancho, that you are very frightened.”
“Yes,
I am,” responded Sancho, “but what makes your grace see that now more than
ever?”
“Because
you smell now more than ever, and not of amber,” responded Don Quixote.
“That
might be,” said Sancho, “but it’s not my fault, it’s your graces, for choosing
the most ungodly times to put me through the strangest paces.”
“Take
three or four of them back, friend,” said Don Quixote without removing his
fingers from his nose, “and from now on be more mindful of your person and of
what you owe to mine; engaging in so much conversation with you has caused this
lack of respect.”
“I’ll
wager,” replied Sancho, “that your grace thinks I’ve done something with my
person I shouldn’t have.”
“The
less said the better, Sancho my friend,” responded Don Quixote.
--
from Don Quixote, by Miguel de Cervantes
“Done
something with my person I shouldn’t have?” “Rid of the burden that had caused
him so much grief?” “The urge and desire to do what no one else could do for
him”… There are some classic euphamisms in there. It would be interesting to
compare the various translations.
No,
we’re not talking about the return of the Twinkie, though that’s great news,
too. We’re talking about Literary Death Match, the series of bookish bloodsport
title bouts that we began hosting last year to great acclaim and not a little
controversy (see here, here & here.)
We
haven’t been able to say why we halted the matches until now, but we’re proud
to announce this morning that a Federal Judge has thrown out the case brought by the North
American Broadcasters Association on behalf of our intrepid ringside reporter,
Kelly Wallace. Kelly was never a party to these vexatious proceedings, and she
joins me and the rest of our production staff in celebrating this welcome
victory.
Our
first match will pick up where we left off, with dramatic works by Fitzgerald
and Hemingway duking it out for Best Play by a Lost Generation Novelist. Look
for it sometime in the next few weeks. Tickets will go fast!
Time
to heave another month into the Shelf Actualization archives. Above are the
authors we covered this month, and below are the five most popular posts from
the last 30-ish days:
I
read and loved Nineteen Eighty-Four ,
and there’s no denying the lasting influence it has had on our culture. (A-hem!)
I’ve also read Animal Farm ,
and came away convinced that it, too, was an “important” book to have in one’s
arsenal of cultural touchpoints. But man, I don’t know that I enjoyed either
one of them as much as I enjoyed Down and
Out in Paris and London , Orwell’s very first book. DaOiPaL is a hilarious,
instructive and captivating read.
It’s
a non fiction account of the days Orwell nearly starved as homeless vagabond in
London, and as a lowly dishwasher in Paris’s seedy underbelly, and even though
there’s some controversy over how faithfully it records his actual personal
history, it’s a book that had me laughing out loud and cringing with disgust
pretty regularly.
It can be sad sometimes to see a perfectly good word end up
helplessly trapped in a prison of cliched usages. Don’t know what I’m talking
about? How about a few examples? Think of the things that you’ve recently heard
described as scathing . Were they
rebukes or criticisms? I’ll bet they were. And what about utmost ? Have you come across anything utmost that wasn’t sincerity
or respect? I doubt it. And I think we can agree that few things are as ardent
as supporters, or as insurmountable as odds.
Gall and disaster have something in common: they are about
the only things that are quite frequently unmitigated
- just as false and obvious are all-too-often patently so. And is anything
as reckless as abandon? Perhaps endangerment, maybe
driving… but mostly abandon. Disregard comes in a number of forms, but none so
common as blatant . On the other hand, nothing is nearly so
rapier as wit. Intuition tells us that a tongue could be rapier, and that wits
could be sharp, but no, it’s sharp tongues and rapier wits until the cows come
home. And don’t let yourself be guilty of switching them around.
Speaking of guilt, do we assuage anything quite so much? We might appease,
alleviate or mollify lots of things, but guilt is about the only thing we
really assuage with any regularity. We condone a lot of
things, but so often we do so tacitly
. We also come to tacit agreements, but I can’t think of many other
places where tacitness comes to the fore (I didn’t even know tacitness was a word before I looked it up for this
sentence.) We never jockey for anything but position. Aspersions are only ever cast. Things are never engulfed in anything but flames. Intrinisic value. Abject failure. Unqualified success. Thinly veiled . I could go on and on. We don’t pique many things besides
interest or curiosity, and I can’t imagine whetting anything but an appetite, can you? Ah, except
maybe a metaphorical whistle, that is. But one thing's for sure: the only thing I ever extol
are virtues.
I’m afraid words like these are, if you’ll allow me one more
cliched pairing to drive the point home, inextricably linked. (Ah, the ‘meta’ cliched coupling if
there ever was one!) But like most inextricable links (they all are these days,
aren’t they?) these pairings are probably just easy and strong, and not actually
bonds from which their constituent parts cannot be extricated.
So I say extricate them. We should grant these words a life outside the cliches. If you love words, set them free.
And here's 80's Sting for a few words on the subject:
We’ve
covered Eudora Welty’s influence on a Grammy-winning album here. But she may
also have inspired the titles of a couple of famous plays, as well.
Arthur
Miller’s “Death of a Salesman” premiered in early 1949, thirteen years after
Welty’s short story “Death of a Traveling Salesman,” a story whose main
character is named Bowman. Bowman? Loman? Coincidence?... Yeah, probably. But
still, both have to do with man’s search for meaning and worth and
accomplishment in life, and both characters come up empty in their search and then die. So I’m
going to go ahead and say: DUN,
DUN, DUN!)
But
what about Tennessee Williams’ “A Streetcar Named Desire,” which premiered at
the end of 1947? The title makes an allegory of the streetcar label that marked
the line serving Desire Street in New Orleans. Did he come upon the idea on his
own? Mmmm probably, but take a look at this excerpt from Eudora Welty’s novel from
two years earlier, Delta Wedding :
“They
had fooled everybody successfully about their honeymoon, because instead of
going to the Peabody in Memphis they had gone to the St. Charles in New Orleans.
Walking through the two afternoons down streets narrow as hallways, they had to
press back against the curb, against uncertain dark-green doors, to let the
streetcars get through. The streetcars made an extraordinary clangor at such
close quarters, as they did in the quiet of the night, and some of them had “Desire”
across the top. Could that have been the name of a street? She had not asked
then; she did not much wonder now.”
I’m
going to go ahead and give her credit for that one, too. Call it penance for
this post.
If
you read for plot, you might not get much out of Delta Wedding .
The
story follows the Fairchild family as they gather and make preparations for the
wedding of their second oldest daughter to the overseer of the family
plantation- a suitor that all of them see as being beneath her. There is little
real-time tension beyond the little recurring worries that certain preparations
might not pan out in time (will the Shepardess Crooks ordered specially from
Memphis for the bridesmaids make it in time?! Inquiring minds want to know!).
Actually,
the most interesting plot points are past events that continue to lurk just
beneath the surface: the marriage of George, the family’s favorite uncle, to a lowly
storekeeper (again, a marriage far below the Fairchilds’ vaunted station), the early
death of an aunt and mother, and the movements of the family between their
various estates. And at the center of it all is a near-tragedy on a picnic
outing, where George stays in front of an oncoming train to help a mentally
disabled cousin get her foot loose from the railroad tracks- an event that has resonance
because that day cemented the romance of the young bride and the overseer, but
also because it threatens to destroy George’s own marriage.
But
these subplots only come to us in glimpses. The real reason to read this book
is for the rich characterization, the complex tapestry of family relationships
and the unforgettable sense of place- which almost stands in as one of the
chief characters- (“The bayou had a warm breath, like a person.”)
Welty
is undoubtedly a masterful writer. My only previous experience with her is the
short story “Where is the Voice Coming From,” which recounts in first-person the
tragic death of Medgar Evers, from the point of view of his racist murderer. It’s
hard to believe the same woman wrote both pieces. I probably won’t be
recommending Delta Wedding to friends and family, and probably won’t
re-read myself it any time soon, but I can already tell it’s a book I’ll be
thinking about for a long time to come. And maybe that’s the only mark of a
great book that matters.
I poked a little fun at
Billy Shakespeare the other day, pointing out a rough similarity in body counts
between King Lear and the comedy/parody film “Hot Shots Part Deux.” And then I came
across this infographic at Biblioklept, which only reinforces the point across
some of his other tragedies. Enjoy:
ShelfActualization
‘blogger emeritus’ Tucker McCann and I will be embarking on a journey through
one of the undisputed masterpieces of literature over the next few weeks. You
are invited to join in the fun, of course.
Arguably the first modern novel, (and still the best, according to some) Don Quixote is a founding work of western literature and has influenced countless other books, from Flaubert’s Madame Bovary to Dostoevsky’s The Idiot . You can find shades of Cervantes’ Knight-Errant in characters as diverse as Melville’s Captain Ahab and Jane Austen’s Catherine Morland.
Now, I’m naturally daunted by any book as thick as my forearm, but I had a goal to tackle one of literature’s “big boys” this year, and it might as well be “the Quixote.”